North-South Research Partnerships Research Articles

Experiences of inequality in international collaborative research – Perspectives from environmental and sustainability scholars from Ghana, West Africa

Global north and south research partnerships are essential for building research capacity in the global south and for generating new knowledge to address complex socio-environmental problems. However, insights from various disciplines, particularly global health research, suggest that north-south research collaborations often reproduce unequal power relations and outcomes. To mitigate these, some international funding organizations have produced guidelines that promote ethical practice in collaborative research. Despite these measures, significant gaps exist in understanding how the experiences and perspectives of Global South scholars, particularly those in the field of environmental sciences, shapes discourses on unequal north-south research partnerships and the ethical guidelines developed to address disparities. To bridge this gap, we conducted explorative qualitative research focused on understanding the experiences of environmental science and sustainability researchers from Ghana in international collaborative research. Our findings revealed a general optimism among scientists regarding the benefits of international collaborative for making impactful contributions in the global south, expanding professional networks, opening opportunities to publish in high impact journals and developing new research skills. At the same time, our findings also indicate that pervasive forms of inequality centered around lack of recognition, poor clarity of roles, disrespect, unequal resource sharing, poor communication, and non-adherence to contractual agreements persist. We contribute to the ongoing scholarly debate on research inequality by proposing a framework to guide the management, design, and implementation of north-south research partnerships. Our proposed framework serves as a starting point toward identifying potential unequal and unethical issues that often arise in north-south research partnerships.

Conflict-sensitive research: bringing research ethics into practice

ABSTRACT Despite increased attention to research ethics and attempts to counter power imbalances in North-South research partnerships, research in conflict contexts is still not fair and equitable. We argue that conflict sensitivity could conceptually and practically contribute towards this goal. A conflict sensitive research approach includes collaborating with locally-based practitioners in the research design, data collection, analysis and outreach. This would make knowledge production in conflict contexts more ethical, relevant and beneficial to everyone involved.

Rethinking North–South Research Partnerships Amidst Global Uncertainties: Leveraging Lessons Learned from UK GCRF Projects during COVID-19

International research and development projects (or grand challenge projects) consist of multicultural, multi-country, multi-sectoral, and multi-stakeholder initiatives aimed at poverty reduction. They are usually conceived as partnerships between actors in the global north–south. The COVID-19 pandemic was a major unexpected disruption to ongoing projects and challenged their already complex management. The aim of this paper is to present evidence on how international development projects were impacted by COVID-19 with a particular focus on the relationship between research institutions in the north and south. We conducted a mixed-methods research study, combining a reflective exercise with the co-author team and a survey with principal investigators, project managers, and capacity development leads drawn from 31 Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) projects funded through the UK government’s Official Development Assistance (ODA) and focused on social–ecological system research. The survey contained closed- and open-ended questions in order to (i) demonstrate how those involved in managing projects adapted to risks, including both threats and opportunities, presented by the COVID-19 pandemic, and (ii) consider the implications for tailoring adaptive management approaches in international research projects amidst uncertainties, with a special focus on enhancing equities in global north–south partnerships. The paper offers the following recommendations on designing, planning, and implementing international research and development projects: (i) devolve project management in order to enhance project resilience and improve north–south equities; (ii) allocate dedicated resources to enable equitable north–south research partnerships; (iii) rely more on hybrid and agile approaches for managing a project’s life cycle; and (iv) improve resource flexibility, transparency, and communication through enhanced funder–implementer collaboration.

Transforming North-South research partnerships: Lessons learned from energy, technology & enterprise global challenge research fund projects

The Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) provided a mechanism for academia to undertake projects relevant to the Sustainable Development Goals but there have been limited opportunities to critically interrogate such projects. In this paper we will use the Technology Implementation Model for Energy to deconstruct the purpose, assumptions and expectations, engagement strategies, and reflective processes of four GCRF projects in order to better understand relationships between researchers and those being researched. Thus, the aim of this paper is to explore and understand the lived experiences of four inter-disciplinary GCRF Primary Investigators implementing poverty alleviating technologies in a range of sectors to generate recommendations that can be applied to wider academic communities engaging with vulnerable populations.Our key findings show that despite the integration of Theory of Change models and the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) framework in GCRF-funded projects, project aims continue to be driven by researchers rather than reflecting end-user needs. Whilst some projects looked to generate feelings of ownership, adequate engagement strategies and reflective learning practices, these processes are often not formally embedded in project activities resulting in a decoupling of researcher expectations and end-user assumptions – ultimately derailing project outcomes. Our recommendations for academics operating within the International Development space are to 1) Talk early, often and transparently, 2) Keep Thinking – who benefits?, 3) Be reflective, responsive, and open to change and, 4) Use a systematic approach to facilitate this process.

Equity in Global North–South research partnerships: interrogating UK funding models

This article considers the degree to which achieving equity in Global North–South research partnerships is possible under current UK funding models. While there has been significant discussion with respect to the decolonisation of research, it will be argued that there is some distance between the language of equity articulated currently by UK funding bodies, and the realities of working as a project partner in the Global South. The article draws on the prior and ongoing experiences of a multidisciplinary team of researchers brought together by a UK-funded research project. In the interests of moving towards more equitable systems of knowledge production and dissemination, it explores the power asymmetries that can be inherent in Global North–South research partnerships, and the extent to which issues of coloniality continue to shape aspects of research agenda setting, project framing, impact, academic publishing and the division of labour within partnerships.

What makes working together work? A scoping review of the guidance on North-South research partnerships.

At their best, research partnerships provide a mechanism to optimize each partner’s strengths, make scientific discoveries and achieve development goals. Each partner stands to gain from the relationship and perceives it to be fair. However, partnerships between institutions in the global North and the global South have been beleaguered by structural inequalities and power imbalances, and Northern stakeholders have been criticized for perpetuating paternalistic or neo-colonial behaviours. As part of efforts to redress imbalances and achieve equity and mutual benefit, various principles, guidelines, frameworks and models for partnership have been developed. This scoping review maps the literature and summarizes key features of the guidelines for North–South research partnerships. The review was conducted between October 2020 and January 2021. Three academic journal databases and Google were searched, and additional resources were identified through a hand search of reference lists and expert recommendation. Twenty-two guidelines were identified published between 1994 and 2021 and originating predominantly in the fields of international development and global health. The themes addressed within the guidelines were aggregated using NVivo qualitative analysis software to code the content of each guideline. Topics featuring most prominently in the guidelines were: partner roles, responsibilities and ways of working; capacity strengthening; motivation and goals; resource contributions; agenda setting and study design; governance structures and institutional agreements; dissemination; respect for affected populations; data handling and ownership; funding and long-term commitments. The current study reinforces many of the themes from two recent scoping reviews specific to the field of global health, but gaps remain, which need to be addressed: Southern stakeholders continue to be under-represented in guideline development, and there is limited evidence of how guidelines are used in practice. Further exploration is needed of Southern stakeholder priorities and whether and how guidelines are operationalized.

Pathways to research leadership for early career researchers in Africa: A potential role for African and Global Funders

Early career researchers at African universities face numerous challenges and demands within a context of minimum resources; yet on the other hand, there is significant expectation for doing excellent science that is of high quality with integrity, while aligning science with societal goals. Furthermore, there is also expectation to increase outputs, make the system more inclusive, attract international partners and contribute to the University’s global rankings. The need therefore to build research capacity, expand the number of active researchers and advance the careers of African researchers has never been more critical, particularly if continental and other global priorities are to be achieved. There is consensus that research leadership is essential to building research capacity in African universities. As a result, there have been increasing investments in building research capacity and research leadership, with initiatives ranging from the creation of north-south research partnerships across disciplines and empirical subjects, to training research leaders and university administrators in top ranking universities in Europe and North America, as well as building the capacity of funders and science systems in Africa. This article will examine the competencies required to be a research leader and the programs that are currently available that support capacity building in research leadership. In addition, it will provide perspectives on the role that global and African funders should play to advance the careers of early career researchers to transition into research leaders, foster innovation, build linkages with policy makers and promote scientific leadership in Africa.

Safe Spaces for Disruptive Learning in a North–South Research Partnership Context: International Mobility of Doctoral Students

This article spans issues of international student mobility, inequalities in higher education, and spaces for transformative learning for sustainable development. We tracked PhD alumni of an international Swiss research program in 2012 and 2017 and found that students from the global South experienced a significant, immediate career boost; most graduates decided to remain in or return to their country of origin after graduation (brain circulation). Career advancement among global North students took longer to develop. In-depth interviews with selected graduates gave students a voice: they felt empowered by networks, new friendships, and working relationships across disciplinary boundaries. The “safe spaces” or “Third Spaces” created in the program—encompassing inter- and transdisciplinary approaches, institutional and cultural diversity, and a real-world focus—were key for transformative learning, supported by an unconventional teaching and research strategy. To support disruptive learning leading to changes in mindsets and to reduce inequality in higher education, Western universities must question their own privileged position.

Institutional Learning in North–South Partnerships: Critical Self-Reflection on Collaboration Between Finnish and Tanzanian Academics

Knowledge production and its possibilities and pitfalls in North–South research partnerships have gained increasing attention. The previous literature has identified certain pervasive challenges, and suggested a variety of ways to change partnerships, ranging from improvement of current collaboration activities to fundamental transformation of the hegemonic Eurocentric criteria for knowledge. Against this backdrop, we ask what kinds of learning can take place in research partnerships. We draw from two sources – an institutional approach and a classical categorization of learning proposed by Gregory Bateson – to develop a heuristic for analyzing institutional learning in North–South research partnerships. Moreover, based on previous empirical studies and our own experience with academic collaboration between Finnish and Tanzanian scholars, we reflect on the ways in which learning in its different forms shows in partnership practices that need to deal with different, intertwined institutional fields.

Changing modalities in international development and research in education: Conceptual and ethical issues

This article critically examines the nature of changing modalities in international development and related research in education. The consequences of contemporary trends and trajectories in these domains are considered with particular reference to their conceptual and ethical implications. Drawing on contemporary social theory, comparative and international research in education, and research ethics, the analysis focuses on North-South research and development partnerships, conceptions of ‘best practice’ in the arenas of education and development, the emergence of large-scale social and educational research modalities, and the potential and limitations of ‘one size fits all’ ethical frameworks in the field.

Global Health: A Review of Concepts, Players, and Publications

Introduction: The increasing number of global health initiatives have contributed to improving access to health services and building knowledge platforms. However, the distribution of activities and knowledge produced has been uneven. To scope the scientific output in global health, publications from 2008-2017 were reviewed to identify major players, assess the extent of involvement of low- and middleincome countries (LMIC), and map areas of research interest. Methods: A total of 3153 Web of Science (WoS) publications were retrieved, of which 2423 were selected for this review. The country of origin, institutions involved, types of documents, language of publication, journal titles, content categories, authorship, themes, and characteristics of collaboration were examined. Results: Over the years, the number of global health publications from both high-income countries (HIC) and LMIC has increased. Authors from LMIC were engaged in 19.3% of the publications, representing 10.3% of first authors and 9.7% of single-author articles. Collaboration across World Health Organization (WHO) regions ranged from 29.6% to 64.6%. Themes of greatest research interest were capacity development, health policy and systems, and disease control. Conclusion: Global health research is experiencing rapid expansion, but LMIC authors continue to have limited involvement. The current study revealed diversity in publications, journals, and actors with a marked influence from developed countries. As north-south and southsouth research partnerships are increasing across the world, it is important to ensure open collaboration between partners and alignment with public health research priorities and needs.

Quality education and the role of the teacher in Fiji: mobilising global and local values

This article reports on the findings of original field research carried out in the small island developing state of Fiji, in the South Pacific. A North-South research partnership was built upon previous collaboration between team members and, in so doing, pioneered the blending of Pacific and Western research approaches sensitive to a postcolonial positioning. The study interrogates practitioner perspectives on: the nature and quality of teachers and teaching in Fiji; the challenges of teachers’ work and lives; priorities for successful qualitative reform; and theoretical implications for the processes of education policy transfer and qualitative improvement. The analysis draws upon work on the politics of aid and international development, revealing tensions between existing learner-centred policy frameworks and emergent neoliberal and performativity oriented initiatives influenced by international surveys of student achievement, related league tables and the experience of the regional reference societies of Australia, New Zealand and India.

Capacity Diagnostics for Advancing Higher Education in the Developing World: A Case Study from the Republic of Panama

Vol. 7 Núm. 1 (2019): Investigación y Pensamiento Críticoenero-abril 2017
 The past decade of global development has witnessed extensive use of capacity diagnostics for improving the systems and skills needed for national, institutional and organizational development. Little of this experience, however, has been applied to higher education. This paper presents a model for adapting capacity diagnostics to creation of tools for (1) documenting existing resources in higher education institutions or academic areas, and (2) detailing perceptions in the labor market of current assets and gaps to facilitate better planning for and development of required curricular, research and personnel capacities. This model is illustrated with a case study from the Republic of Panama where a North-South research partnership between the National Secretariat for Science, Technology and Innovation (SENACYT) and Tulane University applied the diagnostic to an assessment of the country’s higher education and research in the social sciences. Findings suggest significant discrepancies between the present academic offer and the skills and knowledge required by the productive sector; they also highlight specific institutional and policy adjustments that would strengthen the university system overall and preparation in the social sciences at all levels. This paper refers to the Panama case in a broader discussion of how this research approach may be applied more broadly to inform policy for countries’ higher education systems, particularly in developing regions. As higher education becomes increasingly important for emerging economies’ competitiveness, potential for adoption of this model worldwide is considerable.

Successes and challenges of north–south partnerships – key lessons from the African/Asian Regional Capacity Development projects

IntroductionIncreasing efforts are being made globally on capacity building. North–south research partnerships have contributed significantly to enhancing the research capacity in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) over the past few decades; however, a lack of skilled researchers to inform health policy development persists, particularly in LMICs. The EU FP7 funded African/Asian Regional Capacity Development (ARCADE) projects were multi-partner consortia aimed to develop a new generation of highly trained researchers from universities across the globe, focusing on global health-related subjects: health systems and services research and research on social determinants of health. This article aims to outline the successes, challenges and lessons learned from the life course of the projects, focusing on the key outputs and experiences of developing and implementing these two projects together with sub-Saharan African, Asian and European institution partners.DesignSixteen participants from 12 partner institutions were interviewed. The data were analysed using thematic content analysis, which resulted in four themes and three sub-categories. These data were complemented by a review of project reports.ResultsThe results indicated that the ARCADE projects have been successful in developing and delivering courses, and have reached over 920 postgraduate students. Some partners thought the north–south and south–south partnerships that evolved during the project were the main achievement. However, others found there to be a ‘north–south divide’ in certain aspects. Challenges included technical constraints and quality assurance. Additionally, adapting new teaching and learning methods into current university systems was challenging, combined with not being able to award students with credits for their degrees.ConclusionThe ARCADE projects were introduced as an innovative and ambitious project idea, although not designed appropriately for all partner institutions. Some challenges were underestimated from the beginning, and for such future projects, a more structured approach needs to be adopted. ARCADE partners learned that integrating courses into current university systems and awarding students credits are essential.

Education, Learning, Training: Critical Issues for Development

This volume is the fifth in a series on development policy and international cooperation trendsthat is edited by the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva.Many of the articles build on research by the Network for International Policies and Cooperationin Education and Training (NORRAG), which flavours both the approach (as many papers drawon North–South research partnerships in which network members are involved) and the focus(on technical, vocational and higher education).

Institutional Learning in North-South Research Partnerships

Cet article examine l’évolution récente des pratiques relatives aux partenariats de recherche Nord-Sud, essentiels aujourd’hui pour traiter de questions relatives aux biens publics globaux. Les modalités de ces partenariats sont appelées à évoluer alors que la pertinence des distinctions traditionnelles entre pays « industrialisés » et « en développement », ou entre le Nord et le Sud, s’estompent. Les collaborations scientifiques entre chercheurs du Nord et du Sud se trouvent à la croisée de deux champs organisationnels : le milieu universitaire et la coopération internationale pour le développement. Cela pose des problèmes spécifiques en matière d’apprentissage institutionnel. Notre étude montre que les partenariats de recherche Nord-Sud ne sont guère à l’abri des tensions inhérentes aux relations entre donateurs et bénéficiaires, bien connues dans le champ de l’aide au développement. Malgré de récentes améliorations, les modalités de financement et les relations de pouvoir qui en découlent restreignent les possibilités de combiner les aspirations de renforcement des capacités de recherche des partenaires du Sud avec la quête d’excellence telle que définie par les partenaires du Nord. La pression croissante de publier rapidement les résultats de recherche dans certaines revues disciplinaires publiées au Nord limite les possibilités d’établir un cadre partenarial équitable et de renforcer les capacités institutionnelles des parties impliquées. Il s’agit de réexaminer les questions de financement, d’accès et de partage des connaissances et de pouvoir dans des partenariats de recherche.

Assessing global partnerships in graduate nursing

North-South partnerships in graduate nursing education can prepare students to address global healthcare issues, increase cultural competence, and build research capacity. However, the current literature does not include a critical and systematic assessment of partnerships using established guidelines. This paper has two objectives: 1) Find and refine a suitable measure to assess a North-South inter-institutional research and clinical partnership in nursing; 2) Pilot test an assessment measure and describe the results of a systematic institutional self-evaluation of a developing North-South research and clinical partnership within a graduate nursing program. The first objective was addressed by searching for, examining and selecting an assessment measure. The second objective was obtained by applying the assessment measure to a developing graduate-level research and clinical partnership between a Canadian School of Nursing and a Malawian College of Nursing; qualitative data collected included information from a document review and subjective experiences of partners. Results showed that when appropriate revisions are made to an existing guideline, it is applicable to use as an assessment measure for North-South inter-institutional research and clinical partnerships. Recommendations for improvement were made, allowing the guideline to be more specific for research and clinical partnerships. Results demonstrated that the existing Canadian-Malawian partnership was strongest in the guideline category of "shaping the purpose and scope of the partnership," and weakest in "partnership implementation and context." This paper implies that: 1) evaluation can strengthen partnerships and enhance educational experience for nursing students; 2) research comparing and contrasting different genres of partnerships could help determine which type is the most appropriate for an institutions' particular outcome goals; and 3) effective establishment and maintenance of North-South partnership occurs through an on-going process of evaluation.

Establishing and sustaining research partnerships in Africa: a case study of the UK-Africa Academic Partnership on Chronic Disease.

This paper examines the challenges and opportunities in establishing and sustaining north–south research partnerships in Africa through a case study of the UK-Africa Academic Partnership on Chronic Disease. Established in 2006 with seed funding from the British Academy, the partnership aimed to bring together multidisciplinary chronic disease researchers based in the UK and Africa to collaborate on research, inform policymaking, train and support postgraduates and create a platform for research dissemination. We review the partnership’s achievements and challenges, applying established criteria for developing successful partnerships. During the funded period we achieved major success in creating a platform for research dissemination through international meetings and publications. Other goals, such as engaging in collaborative research and training postgraduates, were not as successfully realised. Enabling factors included trust and respect between core working group members, a shared commitment to achieving partnership goals, and the collective ability to develop creative strategies to overcome funding challenges. Barriers included limited funding, administrative support, and framework for monitoring and evaluating some goals. Chronic disease research partnerships in low-income regions operate within health research, practice, funding and policy environments that prioritise infectious diseases and other pressing public health and developmental challenges. Their long-term sustainability will therefore depend on integrated funding systems that provide a crucial capacity building bridge. Beyond the specific challenges of chronic disease research, we identify social capital, measurable goals, administrative support, creativity and innovation and funding as five key ingredients that are essential for sustaining research partnerships.

Supporting Southern-led Research: Implications for North—South Research Partnerships

Background: Global health research partnerships are commonly led by Northern investigators who come from resource-rich research environments, while Southern partners participate with a paucity of research skills and resources. This power asymmetry within North–South research partnerships may further exacerbate the unequal distribution of benefits from the research process. Methods: This study is designed to present the benefits and challenges of engaging in the research process from the perspective of The AIDS Support Organization (TASO), an HIV/AIDS care and treatment organization that has been involved in global health research partnerships. It uses a validated research tool entitled “Is Research Working for You?” to facilitate qualitative interviews surrounding the experienced benefits and challenges in engaging in the research partnerships as described by TASO staff. Results: Three key themes emerged from the content and thematic analysis: 1) the reported benefits of research (e.g., evidence-based management, advocacy, etc.), 2) the challenges the research committee members face in becoming more involved in the research process (e.g., lack of data analysis skill, lack of inclusion in the research process, etc.), and 3) the institutional ambition at TASO to develop a Southern-led research agenda. Conclusions: This is one of the few studies to document the development of a Southern-led research agenda in addition to the challenges of engaging in the research process. Mechanisms for moderating power dynamics within North–South partnerships can provide opportunities for improved research capacity and quality.

Supporting southern-led research: implications for North-South research partnerships.

Global health research partnerships are commonly led by Northern investigators who come from resource-rich research environments, while Southern partners participate with a paucity of research skills and resources. This power asymmetry within North-South research partnerships may further exacerbate the unequal distribution of benefits from the research process. This study is designed to present the benefits and challenges of engaging in the research process from the perspective of The AIDS Support Organization (TASO), an HIV/AIDS care and treatment organization that has been involved in global health research partnerships. It uses a validated research tool entitled "Is Research Working for You?" to facilitate qualitative interviews surrounding the experienced benefits and challenges in engaging in the research partnerships as described by TASO staff. Three key themes emerged from the content and thematic analysis: 1) the reported benefits of research (e.g., evidence-based management, advocacy, etc.), 2) the challenges the research committee members face in becoming more involved in the research process (e.g., lack of data analysis skill, lack of inclusion in the research process, etc.), and 3) the institutional ambition at TASO to develop a Southern-led research agenda. This is one of the few studies to document the development of a Southern-led research agenda in addition to the challenges of engaging in the research process. Mechanisms for moderating power dynamics within North-South partnerships can provide opportunities for improved research capacity and quality.